Pg.

1 / 23

School of Engineering

Subject Code: PRJ 62404

Engineering Design & Analysis

Student Handbook

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 2 / 23

PROJECT INFORMATION

The Module or Project co-ordinator for Engineering Design and Analysis is given as below:

Dr. Ku Pei Xuan

Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering
Faculty of Innovation and Technology
Taylor’s University Lakeside Campus

Ext: 5264 (Academic suite C9)

Email: PeiXuan.Ku@taylors.edu.my

Remarks:
Any changes to this handbook shall be communicated to students through announcements via Taylors
Online Portal.

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 3 / 23

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0 Introduction 4

2.0 Expectation of students and module coordinators 5

3.0 Proposal (10%) 6

4.0 Test (30%) 6

5.0 Final report (30%)

5.1 Evidences (10%) 6

5.2 Meeting minutes & team analysis (10%) 7

5.3 Return on failure (10%) 7

6.0 Peer assessment (10%) 8

7.0 Engineering fair (20%) 8

8.0 Budget Management 8

8.0 Appendix

8.1 Proposal assessment rubric (10%) 9

8.2 Return of failure form 11

8.3 Final report assessment rubric – Return on failure (10%) 12

8.4 Final report assessment rubric – Evidence (10%) 14

8.5 Final report assessment rubric – Team analysis (10%) 15

8.6 Template of meeting record 16

8.7 Template of team analysis 17

8.8 Peer assessment rubric (10%) 18

8.9 Engineering fair assessment rubric (20%) 19

Project closure form 20

Claim details 22
Submission for claim acknowledgement 23

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 4 / 23

1.0. Introduction

One of the most important analytical tools that an engineer must have is the ability to conceive, design,
implement and operate a product. This module provides a basis for fresh (1st Semester) engineering
undergraduates to undergo most, if not all the engineering design processes that are needed to eventually
attain these skills in idea conceptualisation to product realisation.

The module Engineering Design and Analysis (PRJ 62404) is conducted during the 1st semester across all
engineering disciplines within Taylor’s University. This module equips the students with soft skills such
as team working, critical thinking, report writing, social, cultural and ethical aspects of an engineer. The
manual drawing sections enhance the ability of the students in idea conceptualization in this module as
well as the other modules. Environmental issues as well as its impact on engineering projects are discussed
with focus especially on eco preservation and green technology.

The learning outcomes (LO) for this module are:

1. Produce useful ideas and concepts using Brain Storming (C)
2. Design a system that solves a complex engineering challenge using the Design Process (D)
3. Conclude findings from working in a team through technical documentation (I&O)
4. Analyse engineering problems using knowledge and understanding of engineering science.

Students will be assigned into group of maximum four to five members to complete an engineering
challenge within the semester. These groups will be formed randomly without gender or intellect bias.
Besides having a team leader, each group will have a credit controller responsible for the reimbursement
of approved funding. The nomination of secretary for documentation processes is strongly recommended
to avoid any discrepancy regarding the contribution of team members. Each group will have a main
supervisor to provide guide on good practices and technological applications regarding the project.

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 5 / 23

The student attainment for this module is assessed from the plan below:

Assessment % Mode Week Criteria

Proposal 10 Group 6 Thoroughness in thinking through the project
Clear demonstration on the design techniques
Test 30 Individual 7
which have been taught in the module
Thoughtful analysis of the team progression
together with the quality of evidences for
Final report 30 Individual 13
achievement of LOs and brilliant failures updated
on timely basis
Thoughtful analysis of how effectively did your
Peer group work. If the behaviors of any of team
10 Individual 13
Assessment members particularly valuable or detrimental to the
team.
Engineering Performance as assessed by judges during
20 Group 14
Fair engineering fair

Please note that any work submitted after the deadline (which may have been extended) shall have the percentage
grade assigned to the work on face value reduced by 10% for the first day and 5% for each subsequent day late. A
weekend counts as 1 day. Lecturers reserve the right to not accept work submitted more than 1 week late.

2.0. Expectation of Students and Module Coordinators

The following entails the expectation from both students and module coordinators. It is the duty of the
students to ensure that the module coordinators are aware of these expectations.

Students must:
 Group registration- Be registered on TIMeS** for student group allocation. **Changes may applied
 Keep all evidences for the work done. The evidences must be related to the learning outcome of
the module.
 Team analysis form- Get their team analysis form progressively signed by the supervisor at an
absolute minimum of once in every two weeks.
 Meeting minutes - Minute all meetings with the module coordinator and to be able to produce a
copy of the minutes a week after the meeting.
 Plagiarism checking - Submit all documents and information on the dates prescribed through
Turn-it-in. Not plagiarise their workyes
 Inform the module coordinators on the venue of them working on the project, during which staff
members can contact them.
 Attend and be punctual to the lectures and discussion sessions.
 Comply with the laboratory rules to ensure safety.

The supervisor is expected to:

 Maintain regular contact with the students to supervise their progress.
 Work with the students to clearly define the objectives of the project and the envisaged outcome.
 Check the evidences presents by students and test their understanding on the learning outcomes.
 Keep attendance record for the mentor-mentee meeting.
 Be responsible for the completion of the assessments, after which to be forwarded to the module
coordinator.

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 6 / 23

3.0. Proposal (10%)

Project Proposal Guidelines
The design proposal is a group submission which comprises 10% of the overall assessment. The objective
of the design proposal is to guide the students in following good management practices.

Maximum pages: 25 (including appendix)

Content
A design proposal is expected to contain at least the following information:
 Content
 Executive summary
 Background/Introduction
 Concept/ Decision matrix
 Methodology/Approach (System architecture, configuration design…)
 Project Management
o Project budget
o Project timeline/Gantt Chart
o Linear Responsibility Chart
 Conclusion
 Appendix
o References

The marking rubric can be found in section 8.1 (Appendix, page 9).

Proposal Submission
Plagiarism checking - Softcopy of the proposal should be uploaded through TIMeS Turn-it-in.
Deadline for the submission is on Thursday in Week 6, 11:59 pm.

4.0. Test (30%)

Students are required to sit for the mid-term exam. Three questions will be given to assess the attainment
of each learning outcome. The mid-term test is scheduled in Week 7.

5.0. Final report (30%)

The objective of final report is to assist students in assessing their learning outcomes through reflecting and
documenting their achievements (evidences) with respect to the learning outcomes of the module.

5.1. Evidences (10%)

Students are required to compile all the evidences, including photographs, journal papers, reports,
coursework, technical drawing, video clips, written material, audio presentation, exams and quizzes, to
demonstrate their attainment on the module learning outcomes. Evidences can be combined to show a clear
picture of how the students relate their learning experiences with the course learning outcomes. The style
of writing should be technical and not storybook-like.
Detailed engineering analysis, e.g. principles, theories, mathematical calculations, etc., should be
attached as evidences.

The marking rubric can be found in section 8.4 (Appendix, page 14).

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 7 / 23

5.2 Meeting Minutes & Team Analysis (10%)

Students are required to have a short meeting with the module coordinator at least once every 2 weeks. The
schedule of the meeting is to be determined by both module coordinator and students. The meeting should
involve, but not constrained to the following:
 Student presenting evidences to the supervisor/s
 Supervisor/s giving feedback and comments to the students based on the evidences presented
 Student updating on the team analysis form and discussing with the supervisors on the team status

Students are required to produce the meeting minutes from the previous week during the meeting. The
template for meeting record can be found in section 8.6 (Appendix, page 16). The marking rubric can be
found in section 8.5 (Appendix, page 15).
Note on the usage of this template.

1. Prepare a fresh sheet for each meeting.

2. List the name of all participants from your team at the meeting.
3. Note the semester week and date of the meeting. For completeness, it is advisable to also note in
the same column the venue and time of the meeting.
4. Record the update provided and/or questions asked in the update column. If necessary, produce
the previous meeting record to show what was agreed on in the previous meeting and how you
have progressed from there.
5. Record details of the feedback received.
6. At the bottom of the page, indicate the stage your team is at and justify why you think your team
is at that stage and what is your plan to progress towards performing.
7. Have this checked and signed by the module coordinator before you leave.
8. Your module coordinator will not sign any meeting record after that and your submission will be
marked based only on signed records. In other words, a team member will need to update this
record as the meeting progresses.

Guidelines to fill in the team analysis form: (start from week 2, submit on Week 3/5/8/11/13)
 Students are required to update the team analysis once every two weeks using the form specified
at Appendix 8.7.The marking rubric for team analysis can be found in section 8.5 (Appendix, page
15)
 The team analysis comprises:
Team stage Based on Tuckman’s model, specify the current stage of the team
Team activities Summarize the activities the team members have conducted in no
more than 150 words
Reflection Responses of the member’s experiences, opinions, thoughts and
feelings. Specify the activities which he/she would like to conduct
in the coming week, to push the team toward the performing stage.
No more than 150 words.
Project status Specify the project status based on the Gantt chart

5.3 Return on Failure (10%)

Making mistakes and failing is an integral part of learning. Failures and mistakes can be the result of
accidents, miscommunication, ignoring instructions or regulations or ignoring basic laws of nature. Failures
can also be a result of trial and error when the correct answer or the right solution does not exist or has not
been discovered yet.

Failures are often a source of very valuable learning. In order for us to reap the full benefit of the failures
we encounter and mistakes we make, it is necessary for us to see failure as an investment that we can seek
return over. This form is named Return on Failure and is designed to help you analyse your failure and
grow. The form for Return on Failure can be found in section 8.2 (Appendix, page 11). The marking rubric
can be found in section 8.3 (Appendix, page 12).

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 8 / 23

Final report Submission

Plagiarism checking - Softcopy of the proposal should be uploaded through TIMeS Turn-it-in.
Deadline for the submission is on Thursday in Week 13, 11:59 pm.

The marking rubric can be found in section 8.4 (Appendix, page 9).

6.0. Peer assessment (10%)

Peer assessment among group members will be done. The assessment form is shown in section 8.8
(Appendix, page 18)

7.0. Engineering Fair (20%)

The Engineering Fair score for each team is calculated based on the average score received from the judges
on the day.

Each team will be given 5 minutes to demonstrate the final artefact to the module coordinator and judges
in terms of functionality and practicality, followed by 10-minute Q&A session, in which each team
member will be assessed individually based on the depth of the applications of the artefact, knowledge on
the principles and capability in operating the artefact, in the most effective and efficient way.

The marking rubric can be found in section 8.9 (Appendix, page 19).

8.0. Budget Management

Students should submit their proposed budget breakdown to the lecturer for approval by Week 5 which
is to be included in the Design Proposal. All receipts for expenses of the projects should be retained and
claimed at the end of the semester. Budget for project should not exceed the amount submitted in the
Design Proposal – any additional expenditure will need to be approved by the supervisor before
purchasing takes place.

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 9 / 23

9.0. Appendix
8.1 Proposal Assessment Rubric (10%)

Area Band Criteria

Objective/Challenge of the project clearly stated with all the necessary

Objective or 4-5
background information.
challenge of the
project (5m) Objective/Challenge somewhat described and certain details are either missing
0-3
or unclear.

Area Band Criteria

Concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the project are based on sound scientific
principles and demonstrate element of critical thinking in their formulation.
Technological feasibility, economic viability, and impacts on the environment
7-10
and sustainability of the concept(s) and/or hypothesis have been thoroughly
considered. The concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the project is also complied
with the legal and ethical standards determined by the relevant authorities
Concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the project are based on relevant scientific
principles and demonstrate low level of critical thinking in their formulation.
Technological feasibility, economic viability, and impacts on the environment
Concept or 4-6 and sustainability of the concept(s) and/or hypothesis have been considered
hypothesis (10m) with varying degree of flaws. The concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the project
did not take consideration of the legal and ethical standards determined by the
relevant authorities
Concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the project are not based on any scientific
principle and do not demonstrate element of critical thinking in their
formulation. Technological feasibility, or/and economic viability, or/and
0-3 impacts on the environment and sustainability of the concept(s) and/or
hypothesis have not been considered. The concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the
project did not comply with legal and ethical standards determined by the
relevant authorities

Area Band Criteria

Suggested approach is based on sound scientific principles and demonstrates
element of critical thinking in their formulation. The technology feasibility,
economic viability and impacts on the environment and sustainability of the
7-10
approach have been thoroughly considered. The suggested approach is
complied with the legal and ethical standards determined by the relevant
authorities
Suggested approach has varying degree of flaws or indicates a lack of critical
Approach or thinking in their formulation. The technology feasibility, economic viability
Methodology and impacts on the environment and sustainability of the approach have been
4-6
(10m) considered with varying degree of flaws. The suggested approach did not take
consideration of the legal and ethical standards determined by the relevant
authorities
Suggested approach has weak basis and indicates minimum or no element of
critical thinking in their formulation. Technology feasibility, or/and economic
0-3 viability, or/and impacts on the environment and sustainability of the approach
has not been considered. The suggested approach does not with the legal and
ethical standards determined by the relevant authorities

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 10 / 23

Area Band Criteria

Proposal details detail project-planning information such as budget breakdown,
7-10 project timeline, linear responsibility chart, bill of materials (BOM), and other
Project project management matters that will ensure project success.
management Contain varying degree of project planning details such as budget breakdown,
(10m) 4-6 project timeline, linear responsibility chart, bill of materials (BOM), and other
project management matters that will ensure project success.
0-3 Contain no details of project planning

Area Band Criteria

The proposal is written accordingly to the content framework, with clear and
4-5 concise English. Figures and tables are used effectively to illustrate the project
outcome systematically
Format (5m)
The proposal is written with or with loose content framework, with varying
0-3 degree of flaws in English proficiency. Figures and tables are used in varying
degree of flaws to illustrate the project proposal

Total mark for the module = (Total mark from each category)/40 x 10

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 11 / 23

8.2 Return on Failure

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
PRJ 62404 ENGINEERING DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

Failure Analysis Form

Complete the sections below. You may expand the space and use diagrams and pictures as necessary

Describe the failure or mistake that you are analysing

(Describe whether the mistake or failure is physical, technical, relational or otherwise. If the failure was done
in the course of a trial and error process, describe the cutting edge of technology/knowledge that you are
exploring as well. The failure may happen while you are testing a new process or device or while you are trying
a new skill. Use pictures, sketches and diagrams if necessary)

Examine what was the Root Cause of the failure

(Ask 5 Why questions starting with “Why did this failure happen?” if the answer is the failure occurred because
of “X”, then ask “Why did X happen?” and repeat this 5 times. This will yield the Root Cause of the failure)

Are there any other ways that you could have failed to achieve your objectives?
(Here try to predict other ways that failure could have also happened)

Describe how you will use the insight above so that you eliminate or minimise the
possibility of failure in the future.

What are the other key learnings from this failure?

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 12 / 23

8.3 Final report Assessment Rubric- Return on Failure (10%)

Area Band Criteria

7-10 Precisely and clearly describe a failure due to adopting an innovative approach
Failure
4-6 Briefly describe a failure due to adopting an innovative approach
description
1-3 Briefly describe a failure with little or no adoption of innovative approach

Area Band Criteria

7-10 Ability to critically identify all the possible root causes with logical explanation
Root cause 4-6 Ability to critically identify some possible root causes with logical explanation
examination
Somewhat describes some possible root causes with certain details either
1-3
missing or unclear.

Area Band Criteria

Ability to critically identify all the possible failures and assess the impacts of
7-10
the failures with logical explanation
Failure analysis Ability to identify some possible failures and assess the impacts of the failure
4-6
with explanation
Somewhat identifies few possible root causes with certain details either missing
1-3
or unclear.

Area Band Criteria

Ability to provide detailed plans to mitigate all the identified causes of
4-5
Prevention Plan failures
1-3 Ability to provide plans to mitigate some of the identified causes of failures

Area Band Criteria

4-5 Ability to identify valuable key learning relevant to the failure
Key learning Somewhat identify few key learning with certain details either missing or
1-3
unclear.

Total mark for the module = (Total mark from each category)/40 x 10

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 13 / 23

--- Empty ---

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 14 / 23

8.4 Final report Assessment Rubric- Evidence (10%)

Learning Outcomes Level 1: Beginner (1-2 Marks) Level 2: Intermediate (3-4 Marks) Level 3: Demonstrable (5 Marks)
Has good understand on the rationale
Has the basic knowledge on Experience in facilitating or leading
of the rules and procedures of
(LO1) Produce useful brainstorming, including the brainstorming session. Has
brainstorming and able to apply
1 ideas and concepts using rules and procedures. successfully facilitated a
brainstorming to generate ideas.
Brain Storming (C). Participated in at least one brainstorming session to generate
Participate in more than one
brainstorming session. useful ideas
brainstorming sessions.
(LO2) Design a system that
Has the ability to apply these
solves a complex Has the basic ability to describe Has successfully applied these
techniques and be able to describe how
2 engineering challenge some of the design techniques techniques to solve a engineering
they apply these techniques and its end
using the Design Process and to apply these techniques. challenge
results
(D).
Learning Outcomes Level 1: Beginner (1-2 Marks)*2 Level 2: Intermediate (3-4 Marks)*2 Level 3: Demonstrable (5 Marks)*2
Written report and other engineering
Written report and other engineering
Written report does not present documentation presents results,
documentation is generally well
(LO3) Conclude findings analysis, results and detailed engineering analysis and
written but contains some
from working in a team recommendations clearly, is recommendations logically, is well
3 grammatical, rhetorical and/or
through technical poorly organized, and/or organized and easy to read, contains
organizational errors; analysis, results
documentation (I&O). contains major grammatical and high quality graphics, contains few
and recommendations are mentioned
rhetorical errors. minor grammatical and rhetorical
but not fully discussed.
errors.

Level 1: Student is able to show knowledge of the learning outcome and is essentially achieved by paying
attention and participating in class & discussion.
Level 2: Student is able to apply the acquired knowledge in a limited context.
Level 3: Student becomes proficient in the learning outcome and knows when and how to apply it.

Total mark = (Total mark from each category) /20 x 10

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 15 / 23

8.5 Final report Assessment Rubric- Team analysis (10%)

Area Band Criteria

The supervisor and students have at least 5 times meeting signed by the
8-10
supervisor and minutes meeting as the attachment before the deadlines.
The supervisor and student have less than 5 times meeting signed by the
Submission 4-7
supervisor and minutes meeting as the attachment before the deadlines.
The supervisor and student have less than 5 times meeting signed by the
0-3
supervisor without minute meeting before the deadlines.

Area Band Criteria

The feedback shows clear understanding about the team progression and
8-10 reflects on the minute meeting. Explain action which had been taken to
overcome the issues.
Feedback
The feedback shows clear understanding about the team progression and
4-7
reflects to the minute meeting.
0-3 The feedback shows understanding about the team progression.

Area Band Criteria

Accurately identified the different stages of team progression based on the
8-10 Tuckman’s model. The stage of the team corresponds to the feedback and is
supported by the meeting minutes.
Identified some the different stages of team progression based on the
Team stage 4-7 Tuckman’s model. The stage of the team is somehow corresponds to the some
of the feedback and partly supported by the meeting minutes.
Poorly used of the Tuckman’s model to identify the team stage. The stage of
0-3 the team does not correspond to the feedback and no evidence of meeting
minutes

Area Band Criteria

Meeting minutes are presented clearly, adhere to the format, and show the
8-10 details of the matter discussion, updated progressively with the individual
responsibility.
Minutes meeting
Meeting minutes are presented clearly, adhere to the format, and shows the
4-7
matter discussion, updated with the individual responsibility.
0-3 Meeting minutes are submitted without using the appropriate format.

Total mark = (Total mark from each category) /40x 10

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 16 / 23

8.6 Template for meeting records

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
PRJ 62404 ENGINEERING DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

Meeting Minutes Sample Format

Date: Monday, 20th April 2018 Time: 3.00pm
Venue: CDIO Lab

Committee Members Present:

Initials Attendance

Student A (SA) (3/4)

Student B (SB) (4/4)
Student C (SC) (2/4)

ITEM DESCRIPTION/ MATTERS DISCUSSED ACTION

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES

The minutes were projected and briefed through. The minutes is proposed by (NH) and seconded Info
by (CH).

3.0 MATTERS ARISING FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES

Include items arising from previous minutes in this section and note the progress/updates on these SA
arising matters

4.0 MATTERS FOR DISCUSSION

Include title of items that were discussed in the present meeting, the action that needs to be carried SC
out and name of person in charge in the right side column

If an item requires action by all then it needs to be stated as ALL in the Action Column All

If an item requires no action but is an item that is for information only, it needs to be stated as Info
INFO in the Action Column

5.0 ADJOURNMENT

State when meeting ended and when the next meeting will be held

Prepared by: Checked by:

Name and signature of student whom wrote the minutes Name & signature of supervisor

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 17 / 23

8.7 Template for Team Analysis

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING
PRJ 62404 ENGINEERING DESIGN AND ANALYSIS

Team Analysis

Name (s):

Supervisor
Week & Updated team activities Feedback Signature &
date Date

Team stage: Justification:

Project status:

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 18 / 23

8.8 Peer Assessment Rubric (10%)

Student: (been assessed by peer)

Goup:
Total Actual Scoring
Area LO Weight Criteria
Score Marks Band
Routinely provides useful ideas
when participating in the group
8-10 and in classroom discussion. A
leader who contributes a lot of
effort.
Usually provides useful ideas
when participating in the group
Contributions LO1 1 5-7 and in classroom discussion. A
strong group member who tries
hard!
Sometimes provides useful ideas
when participating in the group
0-4 and in classroom discussion. A
satisfactory group member who
does what is required.
Actively looks for solutions to
8-10 problems.
Problem- Refines solutions suggested by
LO2 1 5-7 others.
solving
Does not try to solve problems or
0-4 help others solve problems.
Proactive and always has a
8-10 positive attitude about the task(s).
Moderately proactive and often
Attitude LO1 1 5-7 has a positive attitude about the
task(s).
Not proactive and has a negative
0-4 attitude about the task(s).
Always listens to, shares with, and
supports the efforts of others.
8-10 Tries to keep people working well
together.
Usually listens to, shares, with,
Working with
LO3 1 and supports the efforts of others.
others 5-7 Does not cause problem in the
group.
Rarely listens to, shares with, and
0-4 supports the efforts of others. Not
a good team player.

Total

Mark = (Total mark from each category) /40 x 10

Total marks = (total mark from each group member)/(number of group member)

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 19 / 23

8.9 Engineering Fair Assessment Rubric (20%)

Best Design and Analysis Project Award

Project Title: Group No:

Judge:

3 = Excellent 2 = Average 1 = Weak 0 = No evidence

Criteria Definition Details Score

The importance of design factor is clearly demonstrated with application of engineering
principles.
Design Factor (LO2)

Concept(s) and/or hypothesis for the design project have demonstrated the following criteria:
Technologically feasible: useful ideas & concepts Performance
Able to solve a complex engineering challenge Performance
Economically viable Cost
Desirable and easy to use Efficiency
Teamwork and communication Efficiency

Design principles have been applied to complete the engineering design project using the
following process:
DESIGN - Clear application of design techniques to develop
engineering solution (LO2) Design
Approach

IMPLEMENT - Comprehensive testing procedures are

planned and operated to assess the functionality, Time taken (Maximum
reliability and safety of the artefact (LO3) 10 minutes)

OPERATE - Artefact is operated at its full potential with clear

operating procedures (LO3)
Note: If the artefact hit more than two obstacles (including Performance
the side wall), zero mark will be awarded in this section

Total score for Best Design & Communication Project Award

Total mark = (Total mark from each category) /24 x 20

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 20 / 23

Project Closure Form

(Print ALL pages. For cases in which students are not claiming for project parts, please print the
first pg 17, 18 only)

TAYLOR’S UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

PROJECT TITLE:

SUPERVISOR’S NAME:

PART NAME DATE OF CHECKED BY DATE

RETURN

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 21 / 23

Lab housekeeping:

1. Cleanliness

All rubbish and used parts have been disposed from bench tops and floors, machines
(blades, cutting jigs, etc) cleaned and returned to original state

Yes No

2. Properties

All lab equipment, books, catalogues, etc borrowed by students have been returned

Yes No

3. Safety

All safety measures have been taken, i.e. no liquid spills, machines turned off, power
switched off, sharp objects removed / covered to avoid injury, liquid bottles sealed and
kept in designated storage area, no obstructing items that can cause trips / falls, etc.

Yes No

Checked by

LAB OFFICER/ TECHNICAL

OFFICER:………………………………………………………………

DATE:…………………………

Verified by

Module coordinator:……………………………………………….

DATE:………………………….

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 22 / 23

Claim Details

Item Receipt date Amount Group Contact Bank

No. (RM) person/email Account

Module coordinator’s signature:

________________________ _______
Dr. Ku Pei Xuan

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)

 Pg. 23 / 23

Submission for Claim Acknowledgement

I, _____________________________________________________________________

I/C Number ___________________________________________ have submitted claims

of RM ___________________________ with attached original receipts verified by module

coordinator named ________________________________________________, for project

module ___________________________________________________, Sem Mar/Aug ____.

Signature of Student, Signature of Module Coordinator,

________________________ ________________________
(Name: ) Dr. Ku Pei Xuan
Date: Date:

Updated by Dr Ku Pei Xuan (August 2019)